From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A3F2389AC16 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2022 19:12:00 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 4A3F2389AC16 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kernel.crashing.org Received: from [192.168.2.107] ([70.99.78.137]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id 20CJ8tr8023275; Wed, 12 Jan 2022 13:08:55 -0600 Message-ID: <62d5866a-ea76-a56a-7063-dada34b3fe66@kernel.crashing.org> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2022 13:08:54 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.3.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH] elf/dl-deps.c: Make _dl_build_local_scope breadth first Content-Language: en-US To: Adhemerval Zanella , Khem Raj , libc-alpha@sourceware.org Cc: Mark Hatle References: <20211209235354.1558088-1-raj.khem@gmail.com> <018ad7e3-c020-3507-94be-ccb21c90899f@linaro.org> From: Mark Hatle In-Reply-To: <018ad7e3-c020-3507-94be-ccb21c90899f@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, GIT_PATCH_0, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2022 19:12:02 -0000 On 1/11/22 1:26 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: > > > On 09/12/2021 20:53, Khem Raj via Libc-alpha wrote: >> From: Mark Hatle >> >> According to the ELF specification: >> >> When resolving symbolic references, the dynamic linker examines the symbol >> tables with a breadth-first search. >> >> This function was using a depth first search. By doing so the conflict >> resolution reported to the prelinker (when LD_TRACE_PRELINKING=1 is set) >> was incorrect. This caused problems when their were various circular >> dependencies between libraries. The problem usually manifested itself by >> the wrong IFUNC being executed. >> >> Similar issue has been reported here [1] >> >> [BZ# 20488] >> >> [1] https://sourceware.org/legacy-ml/libc-alpha/2016-05/msg00034.html >> >> Signed-off-by: Mark Hatle >> Signed-off-by: Khem Raj > > I am trying to understand why it this only an issue for LD_TRACE_PRELINKING=1, > do we have a testcase that stress it for a default usercase? The underlying issue here is that resolution is happening depth first and not breadth first. According to the ELF spec, all resolution should be breadth-first. As noted in item in above, the prelinker just happens to be a way to actually show that the behavior is incorrect. (There even appears to be a related defect with a reproducer.) When taking the values from LD_TRACE_PRELINKING=1, various addresses and conflict resolutions are specified. When you compare what is reported, vs what happens, vs what the spec says they don't align as they should. > When you say the 'wrong IFUNC being executed' what exactly you mean here? > Could we use a testcase based on this? The prelinker (and possibly just in general), the IFUNC address used is the one from the wrong library scope. I personally have never tried to reproduce this outside of the prelinking use-case, but based on the referenced report and the code at the time of the change, it is believed this could happen (but rarely) without a prelinked system in a very complex case with multiple libraries providing the same functions. The main issue (my memory is sketchy sorry this might be wrong) is that if one or more functions is an IFUNC and one or more functions is NOT, then the you can get into a situation with a conflict of the wrong function being called using the wrong mechanism. Definitely in the prelink case, the resolver gave the address of a regular function which was then placed into an IFUNC (or maybe it was the other way around) triggering the runtime segfault. --Mark >> --- >> elf/dl-deps.c | 14 ++++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/elf/dl-deps.c b/elf/dl-deps.c >> index 237d9636c5..e15f7f83d8 100644 >> --- a/elf/dl-deps.c >> +++ b/elf/dl-deps.c >> @@ -73,13 +73,19 @@ _dl_build_local_scope (struct link_map **list, struct link_map *map) >> { >> struct link_map **p = list; >> struct link_map **q; >> + struct link_map **r; >> >> *p++ = map; >> map->l_reserved = 1; >> - if (map->l_initfini) >> - for (q = map->l_initfini + 1; *q; ++q) >> - if (! (*q)->l_reserved) >> - p += _dl_build_local_scope (p, *q); >> + >> + for (r = list; r < p; ++r) >> + if ((*r)->l_initfini) >> + for (q = (*r)->l_initfini + 1; *q; ++q) >> + if (! (*q)->l_reserved) >> + { >> + *p++ = *q; >> + (*q)->l_reserved = 1; >> + } >> return p - list; >> } >>